Council debates citywide oversized-vehicle parking ban with permit exceptions; staff directed to draft ordinance and signage plan

City staff presented options for regulating oversized vehicles (commonly RVs and similar large vehicles) in the public right of way during a study session that followed the Mary Avenue presentation. The staff presentation summarized enforcement challenges under the current complaint-driven approach and offered a set of options the Planning Commission had reviewed, including a citywide ban with limited exceptions and a resident-permit program.

Director of Public Works Chad Mosley and Community Development staff explained that the city currently enforces a 72-hour parking limit by complaint, using markings and re-inspection; vehicle owners commonly evade enforcement by moving a few inches. Staff said about 200 complaints per year arrive about oversized vehicles, with only a small number of citations issued because of enforcement difficulties.

The Planning Commission recommended a citywide prohibition on oversized-vehicle overnight parking with limited exceptions: a daytime grace period for short stops, an annual resident permit (no charge) and a capped number of 72-hour permits for nonresidents. Under the planning-commission proposal staff presented, resident permits could be issued without requiring repeated trips to a city office; nonresidents might be limited to a small number of 72-hour permits per year and would need to move the vehicle a prescribed distance between permit periods.

Staff noted that a citywide ban permits entrance signage only at city boundaries (far less expensive than signing every block) and estimated signage costs of tens of thousands of dollars. The staff analysis also discussed other cities’ approaches (Redwood City, Saratoga, Los Gatos, Mountain View and San Francisco) and legal context, including Ninth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court precedent cited in national and regional cases. Staff emphasized that immediate towing is generally not feasible and that enforcement likely will rely on issuing citations and outreach to move vehicles along.

Council members discussed several specific items: whether to adopt a citywide ban or a more targeted “hot-spot” approach, the number and form of resident permits (a councilmember suggested 20 annual 72-hour periods for residents), whether to charge nonresident permit fees, how to define “resident,” and how the city would verify and enforce permits. Council members also asked staff to review San Jose’s “van-lording” and Olive programs as possible alternatives and to evaluate fiscal impacts (staff warned the ordinance could require additional staffing for enforcement if complaints increase).

Public commenters and business representatives urged a clear solution; several business letters and speakers said RVs were creating problems near commercial properties and transit corridors while others urged that residents not be unduly burdened when preparing for travel or doing permitted construction. Speakers recommended an evaluation period with quantitative checks (for example, six months to a year) and contingency options if the pilot fails.

The council gave direction to staff to draft an ordinance that would: (1) prohibit overnight oversized-vehicle parking on public streets and public parking facilities with clearly defined hours, (2) create a permit pathway for residents to accommodate loading, vacations and temporary needs (staff discussed a nominal online process and proposed an annual allotment of permitted multi-day uses), (3) provide limited nonresident permits for short visits or business needs, (4) place signs at city entrances and identified problem areas and (5) return to the council with a draft ordinance, implementation plan and cost estimate and with an evaluation plan to report back after a pilot period (staff suggested one year but will refine timing).

Staff and council agreed enforcement would initially remain complaint driven while staff evaluates workload and potential need for additional code-enforcement resources. The council also asked staff to study the San Jose “Olive” program and the van-lording approaches as alternatives and to include signage text and cost estimates in the draft ordinance.

No final ordinance was adopted at the study session; council direction was to return with draft code language, signage, cost estimates and an evaluation plan for the council’s consideration.